An ongoing constitutional crisis emerged in Bangladesh on 5 August 2024, after the Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, resigned and shelter to India as protesters stormed her residence and office in Dhaka during a massive mass uprising.[1][2][3][4][5][6] Hasina's flight to India triggered the constitutional crisis because the existing constitution has no provisions for an interim government or any other form of government in the event that the prime minister resigns and the parliament is dissolved.[7] Although Article 123 of the constitution mandates general elections within 90 days following the dissolution of parliament, no clear guidelines exist for the powers and structure of an interim government.
Several days after Hasina's departure, her son, Sajeeb Wazed, claimed she remained the incumbent prime minister of Bangladesh, as she had not signed a resignation letter.[8]
My mother never officially resigned. She didn’t get the time.... As far as the constitution goes, she is still the prime minister.
Three days after her flight, an interim government was formed, with Muhammad Yunus sworn in as Chief Adviser.[10][3] Following the oath-taking of the interim government, student leader and ICT adviser Nahid Islam announced that a constituent assembly election would be held to draft and adopt a new constitution to resolve the crisis. The interim government also established a Constitutional Reform Commission to prepare a roadmap for the constituent assembly election.[citation needed]
Students in Bangladesh began a quota reform movement in early June 2024 after the Bangladesh Supreme Court invalidated the government's 2018 circular regarding job quotas in the public sector. The movement escalated into a full-fledged mass uprising after the government carried out mass killings of protesters, known as July massacre, by the late of July.[11] By early August, the movement evolved into a non-cooperation movement, ultimately leading to the ouster of the then-Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, on 5 August 2024. Her ouster from office created the constitutional vacuum as the existing constitution does not include any provisions for an interim government, with many[who?] labeling the government "unconstitutional."[citation needed]
Aftermath
Prominent intellectual like Farhad Mazhar urged the interim government to arrange a constituent assembly to solve the "constitutional vacuum," as there is no provision for any kind of interim government in the constitution.[12]
Chief Election CommissionerKazi Habibul Awal said that as a constitutional void was visible in this post-revolution period, legal complexities might arise in the future.[13] "The end of autocracy or the removal of a dictator through revolution is not the ultimate goal or achievement. There are many essential tasks ahead. These must be addressed. Without firm determination, wisdom, courage, and unwavering integrity, this task will not be easy," he added.[13]
A civil servant also protested at the unconstitutional formation of an interim government. She was later removed from her post.[14]
Mob Violence
Since the resignation of the Hasina-led government, incidents of mob violence against women and minorities have increased, reflecting deep-rooted misogyny and religious dogmatism in society.[15] Weakened law enforcement has emboldened perpetrators, who weigh the low risk of prosecution against their desire to “punish”. In one case in Cox’s Bazar, several women were assaulted by a mob accusing them of prostitution—an act streamed live on Facebook and "settled" through mob justice. The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis, proposed by Albert Bandura, helps explain such violence as a response to personal or societal frustrations, now amplified by the breakdown of legal accountability and institutional oversight.[16]
Six months since the interim government took office, concerns about law and order remain, with reports of incidents such as mugging, extortion, and violence continuing.[17] Some members of the public have expressed unease, noting that arrests have not fully restored a sense of security[18]. In response, the Chief Adviser's Press Wing stated that official data indicates stability in major crime categories over the past 10 months, suggesting efforts are ongoing, despite differing perceptions.[19][20]
Controversies
Confusion has arisen following the issuance of the Jatiya Muktijoddha Council (Amendment) Ordinance 2025, which redefines the terms Bir Muktijoddha (valiant freedom fighter) and Muktijuddher Shohojogi (associate of the Liberation War).[21]Liberation War researchers and related organisations have expressed concern over ambiguities in the revised definitions and questioned the necessity of such changes. Critics argue that the amendments may create controversy over the recognition of freedom fighters. The ordinance, issued amends the 2022 Act. Despite mounting criticism, the interim government has dismissed concerns maintaining that the revisions are appropriate and aimed at streamlining the recognition process.[22] However, the clarity regarding such revisions remains lacking, and concerns persist among several members of the advisory council voiced opposition to the amendments during internal meetings, over their potential implications and the lack of clarity in the revised definitions. [23][24]
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
